for recruited athletes ('25 and '26) to P4 programs, what have schools been saying wrt NIL ?
do they talk about it in the official visit and use it as a selling point, or do you have to bring it up and ask them specifically about it?
The answers here will vary greatly based on the sport and the school. Big time college football player at Ohio State/Alabama/etc.? Yes. Basketball at a Duke or Kansas level? Sure. Men’s swim and Diving at well, anywhere really? Not so much.
2 Likes
https://www.swimmingworldmagazine.com/news/a-look-at-how-nil-has-impacted-college-swimming/
there is some NIL in almost every sport, and at the more competitive P4 schools (e.g. top 10-20 Learfield Directors Cup) they have a school-wide collective that funds every varsity sport to some degree
Yes, but there are definitely some sports at some schools that will not survive this. And since the new NIL lawsuit is not yet settled, things are very much in the air at many schools.
1 Like
We are going to be seeing more stories like this. Any extra money that might be available (and I don’t think there will be much, if any) will not be evenly distributed
2 Likes
It wasn’t clear to me… did they cut the varsity program or just the scholarships?
Just the scholarships. I don’t understand why people think this instance has to do with NIL money. It is not the school giving athletes that money, it is donors, booster clubs, sponsors, etc.
Let’s face it, men’s gymnastics - as a popular sport - has been on the decline for several years. The schools see that and will push that money towards the more popular sports to fund more scholarships. The team will still exist, it just won’t be a scholarship sport any longer.
We can’t confuse scholarship money with NIL money. Two completely different sources.
1 Like
The Ohio State AD was pretty explicit that the change was due to the House vs NCAA ruling. Sure, alumni are giving the NIL money, but most will be giving it instead of their donations to the athletic departments, not in addition to them.
2 Likes
The NIL lawsuit is what is causing these program cuts. They are definitely tied together.
1 Like
The first question is about hs kids being recruited. States have different rules, but most don’t allow hs kids to participate in NIL and if they take a contract or sneakers or sign autographs for money, they probably will be ineligible to play in high school. The #1 recruit in Texas a few years ago was supposed to play at Ohio State and gave up senior year of hs to sign contracts, started at Ohio State and then never played. Not sure what the rule is about having an agent when you are 17.
Fall sports kids may get lucky and get NIL offers after they are done playing, but spring sports kids are stuck until they graduate (in most states)
I’m sure recruits at the big time programs can see the NIL money when they have on campus visits. Likely whoever shows them around has more of the details than coaches and administrators. Do you think anyone needs to ask Shedeur Sanders about his NIL money? He wears a diamond “#2” necklace that cost much more than my first house and drives a rolls royce (and several other cars). Other players also have flashy jewelry; Travis Hunter just bought his mother a house, but he doesn’t like the flash too much.
How so?
Most states allow high school students to have NIL deals. Here is the current state by state status:
1 Like
Not sure I agree. If the law suit is settled and there are basically no restrictions on the number of scholarships they need to fully fund, I can see where the AD thinks “we need to stay competitive in women’s gymnastics and where we were limited to 12 scholarships before but now can grant 16 or even 20 to women, we’ll do that to counter the now 110 men’s scholarships we need to award in football.” Remember, Title IX is still alive and the schools will need to award a proportionate number of men’s and women’s scholarships. If Hopkins wants to grant 25 men’s lax scholarship, they’ll have to award 25 to the women. They may need the 25 men’s scholarships to attract the best players.
I don’t know how many athletic scholarships were from direct donations to the athletic department FOR scholarships. It seems like the big booster awards are for things like scoreboards or locker room remodels or flashy things that allow a plaque to be hung up next to it.
1 Like
Which will force schools to pick which programs they will fund and which ones they will have to cut. The athletic budgets are not umlimited. Sports like men’s swimming or men’s gymnastics will likely be on the chopping block, just like the OSU article example.
1 Like
The gymnastics program isn’t getting cut - it’s just not going to have athletic scholarships to give out to recruits. Now, will that eventually lead to it getting cut? Only time will tell I guess.
There are currently only 12 D1 Men’s Gymnastics teams left. It has been on a decline over the years.
1 Like
Under the proposed settlement, scholarship limits have been lifted and schools can now offer full rides to 105 football players. That money is almost certainly coming from other programs.
3 Likes
Right - but that is not because of NIL money, is it?
NIL money is not scholarship money financed by the school itself, as I understand it.
Its all tied up together. Here is what ChatGPT says:
: The case House v. NCAA is a significant lawsuit that involves the topic of Name, Image, and Likeness (NIL) rights for college athletes. NIL refers to the ability of college athletes to profit from their own name, image, and likeness, which had historically been restricted by the NCAA (National Collegiate Athletic Association) under its amateurism rules.
In House v. NCAA, a group of college athletes sued the NCAA, arguing that the organization’s restrictions on athlete compensation—including limits on the ability to earn money from NIL—violate federal antitrust laws. The case revolves around whether the NCAA’s restrictions on NIL and other forms of compensation illegally suppress competition in the market for college athletes’ services.
The lawsuit challenges the NCAA’s long-standing defense that its rules promote amateurism, which the association has used to justify restrictions on athletes’ ability to earn money. This case is a follow-up to other legal battles, such as O’Bannon v. NCAA and Alston v. NCAA, that also challenged the NCAA’s control over athlete compensation.
If successful, House v. NCAA could result in greater financial freedom for athletes, allowing them to profit more fully from NIL deals and other commercial opportunities. It could also significantly alter the future landscape of college sports, as it would place pressure on the NCAA to change or abolish its restrictions on athlete compensation."
No one really knows what “revenue sharing” will look like.
2 Likes
To me that means the landscape of college sports is going to change because the best of the best athletes will only go to the schools where they can get the most NIL money (which does not come directly from the college). So essentially, it will be the schools with the big-time sports-interest donors and alumni who want to be able to say their school won a National Championship who will benefit most. Kind of like how Texas Tech was able to get Nijaree Canady in softball this year from Stanford. The championships will become so much more predictable now in certain sports. You won’t see the unicorn mid-level program being able to make a run at the NCAA championship anymore is some sports because they just won’t have that NIL money to buy the best players. The scholarships will still be there, though.
That’s how I, personally, see the landscape changing.
Not necessarily. Just because a school can offer full rides to the whole roster does not mean that they will. I think you’re right on the rest of it though. Much less parity with the powerhouse schools getting even more powerful, especially in football.