"College Football Is On EBay" is NIL a bad thing?

[outofplace]

Pardon me if this conversation is going on in some college football discussion.

I heard there are over 1,900 players in the transfer right now. It isn't just NIL. It is the combination of that with the transfer portal. Is it a bad thing? Is the tampering out of hand?

Edit: Oops. I screwed up the header. Should be is, not are. Can we fix those? (I started writing it differently and it was getting too long.)

 

[TheSportsPredictor]

Players getting more power and coaches/administrators losing power is good.

Joe Burrow and Justin Fields think the transfer portal is good. So do Caleb Williams and Spencer Rattler.

Did anyone care when players left smaller programs to feed the bigs? Now Clemson, Georgia, Oklahoma, LSU, Ohio State, Alabama, etc. are losing players and whining about it.

 

[outofplace]

Players getting more power and coaches/administrators losing power is good.

Joe Burrow and Justin Fields think the transfer portal is good. So do Caleb Williams and Spencer Rattler.

Did anyone care when players left smaller programs tomfeed the bigs? Now Clemson, Georgia, Oklahoma, LSU, Ohio State, Alabama, etc. are losing players and whining about it.

I do see that side of it. I'm not thrilled with a system that basically encourages cheating (tampering). It's against the rules. I meant to attach the video. It was Dan Patrick who said, "College Football is on eBay." He's not wrong, either.

Those big schools aren't the only ones losing players. Patrick started with comments from Pitt Coach Pat Narduzzi, who has been arguing against the new system from the start. Much of that is losing his star receiver, Jordan Addison, to USC after last season. Is there any doubt USC tampered in that case? I don't think so, but the NCAA isn't doing anything to enforce the rules against it. That screws smaller programs that manage to develop a star, who may just take the NIL money elsewhere and run.

I'm not enough of a college football guy to answer my own question, which is why I put it out there.

 

[poindexter]

Wait a minute. Did tampering/cheating/enticing players just start these last two years?

 

[TheSportsPredictor]

Wait a minute. Did tampering/cheating/enticing players just start these last two years?

That's the thing. It's just in the last couple years the big guys have been losing top players, rather than just taking from the little guys.

 

[outofplace]

Wait a minute. Did tampering/cheating/enticing players just start these last two years?

Of course not, but perhaps it has become more blatant. Again, this is why I ask the question.

 

[Inky_Wretch]

As long as CFB isn't on Wish, it will be OK.

 

[DanOregon]

I miss the days when teams that suddenly started getting 5-stars out of nowhere credited the improvements to their football building and new uniforms for the sudden interent of top-level recruits.

 

[tapintoamerica]

I'm curious what the Mizzou WR from East St. Louis got to show up for the first year and what he has been promised for next year and the year thereafter in order to keep him from the clutches of other suitors. One of his fellow receivers is headed to Georgia.

 

[Della9250]

Wait a minute. Did tampering/cheating/enticing players just start these last two years?

No, but now you can transfer without sitting out on the first transfer, so before the last couple of years you weren't going to get guys of a certain level to leave and go elsewhere.

And there is a difference to the terms tampering / cheating / enticing.

If a player is in the transfer portal -- and there are thousands to pick from -- there should be tampering penalties for schools trying to get guys who have not declared an intent to leave. The UNC QB is a perfect example: he said that programs have not reached out to him directly but through his high school coach and others about trying to get him to leave.

As much as I think it's stupid to give recruits the amounts of money rumored, there's no rules against these collectives from promising them whatever to get them to sign. Should there be at least some sort of limit?? That's for sport/NCAA to decide. But obviously whatever Texas A&M did to get all those five-stars last year obviously didn't work, and I have a feeling that whatever Miami is doing to have a top five class won't either.

 

[Neutral Corner]

You can pay lots of recruits, but there are only so many starting positions. Once they've been paid to join the team, what stops them from going elsewhere if they can't get on the field? And probably get paid yet again to do so?

 

[poindexter]

You can pay lots of recruits, but there are only so many starting positions. Once they've been paid to join the team, what stops them from going elsewhere if they can't get on the field? And probably get paid yet again to do so?

Nothing to stop them. And I love it.
When players start putting guns to the head of colleges to demand money, let me know.

Again, this is why I ask the question.

Got it.
Okay, I will answer. It is not a bad thing. The players are now making money. Or in other cases, now making more money.

The fact that for a century, the players in the second biggest sport in the country made peanuts, was always outrageous to me.