This is what big NIL can get you: 0-2

[CDAGRIZ]

Correct. Why spend money for a “product” they’re currently getting for free.

That's kind of my point. The NFL has the three-year rule. If they did away with it, it would be a free market on top players and possibly curb the NIL arms race. Now, if those top players aren't quite NFL ready, teams could get them under contract and develop them the way they want. "Oh, USC wanted you at CB? We want you at safety." type of thing. Teams could improve their "product" by cultivating it themselves. I said at the outset it's a wacky idea, and I know it'll never happen, but it was in response to an NIL discussion.

 

[PTGrizzly]

That's kind of my point. The NFL has the three-year rule. If they did away with it, it would be a free market on top players and possibly curb the NIL arms race. Now, if those top players aren't quite NFL ready, teams could get them under contract and develop them the way they want. "Oh, USC wanted you at CB? We want you at safety." type of thing. Teams could improve their "product" by cultivating it themselves. I said at the outset it's a wacky idea, and I know it'll never happen, but it was in response to an NIL discussion.

See, I think the NFL likes the 3 year rule. It benefits them.

 

[CDAGRIZ]

See, I think the NFL likes the 3 year rule. It benefits them.

100%, on average. From second-rounders to fringe guys, it absolutely benefits teams to have them get more experience in CFB. The point I was trying to make (albeit apparently very poorly), is that if everyone was draft eligible no matter the age, the very top guys could go to the NFL sooner, and it could make a difference in how much NIL money teams are required to come up with to pay for them.

So, think of it like this:

-Player A is a five-star QB that all the NFL teams have eyes on. He's not draft-eligible for a couple years, so Texas or Oklahoma has to find a way to pay him $3 million (or whatever) to keep him around so he doesn't transfer to somewhere that will pay him that much until he gets drafted.

-Player B is a mid-level LB recruit on the same team who has worked his ass off and has become a great player by his junior year. If Player A was eligible for the Draft, he'd be gone. But he's not, so he takes up a huge chunk of the NIL money that could have been spread between Players B though Z.

I think if NFL "ready" players were able to enter the Draft as soon as teams are willing to draft them, it would decrease the amount of NIL money required to run a top program. If I'm an NFL GM, I'd want those top unicorns in my organization getting coached by the coaches I hired, as soon as possible, even if they don't play right away.

 

[HelenaHandBasket]

100%, on average. From second-rounders to fringe guys, it absolutely benefits teams to have them get more experience in CFB. The point I was trying to make (albeit apparently very poorly), is that if everyone was draft eligible no matter the age, the very top guys could go to the NFL sooner, and it could make a difference in how much NIL money teams are required to come up with to pay for them.

So, think of it like this:

-Player A is a five-star QB that all the NFL teams have eyes on. He's not draft-eligible for a couple years, so Texas or Oklahoma has to find a way to pay him $3 million (or whatever) to keep him around so he doesn't transfer to somewhere that will pay him that much until he gets drafted.

-Player B is a mid-level LB recruit on the same team who has worked his ass off and has become a great player by his junior year. If Player A was eligible for the Draft, he'd be gone. But he's not, so he takes up a huge chunk of the NIL money that could have been spread between Players B though Z.

I think if NFL "ready" players were able to enter the Draft as soon as teams are willing to draft them, it would decrease the amount of NIL money required to run a top program. If I'm an NFL GM, I'd want those top unicorns in my organization getting coached by the coaches I hired, as soon as possible, even if they don't play right away.

I don't believe this reduces NIL. The bottom line is still winning for the Power schools, and they will still throw around silly money to do it.

 

[Da Boyz Mom]

I don't believe this reduces NIL. The bottom line is still winning for the Power schools, and they will still throw around silly money to do it.

Which is why the divorce between the Power 4/5 and the rest of Division 1 is not only likely but inevitable. The group of five and the top FCS schools can compete fairly well against each other but never against the big money schools.

 

[CDAGRIZ]

I don't believe this reduces NIL. The bottom line is still winning for the Power schools, and they will still throw around silly money to do it.

Maybe it wouldn't reduce NIL money. I still think the logic is sound that if a school has to pay millions to retain a player who could otherwise be drafted, it will free up funds because the school doesn't have to pay that player. Kind of like a math thing.

I understand your point that schools are willing to throw around silly money to win, and I agree with it, but that's not what I'm getting at. I believe if the best of the best could be drafted whenever, it could reduce the silliness of the money required to win.

 

[HelenaHandBasket]

Maybe it wouldn't reduce NIL money. I still think the logic is sound that if a school has to pay millions to retain a player who could otherwise be drafted, it will free up funds because the school doesn't have to pay that player. Kind of like a math thing.

I understand your point that schools are willing to throw around silly money to win, and I agree with it, but that's not what I'm getting at. I believe if the best of the best could be drafted whenever, it could reduce the silliness of the money required to win.

I think what it does is shrink the supply, and you know what that does to demand.

 

[CDAGRIZ]

I think what it does is shrink the supply, and you know what that does to demand.

I understand that line of thinking, but I respectfully disagree. There is no shortage (supply) of kids who want to play DI CFB, especially FBS.

My line of thinking is more that, if the Bentleys and Ferraris aren't for sale anymore, people probably wouldn't be willing to pay Bentley/Ferrari money to get a Toyota. Now, the counter to that is that they still want to get the best Toyotas and may pay a premium for a select few. But they are still Toyotas, and there are many more of them to choose from than there are Bentleys and Ferraris.

 

[HelenaHandBasket]

I understand that line of thinking, but I respectfully disagree. There is no shortage (supply) of kids who want to play DI CFB, especially FBS.

My line of thinking is more that, if the Bentleys and Ferraris aren't for sale anymore, people probably wouldn't be willing to pay Bentley/Ferrari money to get a Toyota. Now, the counter to that is that they still want to get the best Toyotas and may pay a premium for a select few. But they are still Toyotas, and there are many more of them to choose from than there are Bentleys and Ferraris.

The flaw with that is even if they are Toyotas, they are not all the same make, model, year, etc. You would just create a new group of Toyotas that schools see as the new Ferraris and Bentleys types.

 

[CDAGRIZ]

The flaw with that is even if they are Toyotas, they are not all the same make, model, year, etc. You would just create a new group of Toyotas that schools see as the new Ferraris and Bentleys types.

Which is why I brought up the counter. If the Bentleys aren't an option, there are many more Toyotas from which to choose. That doesn't make them able to command the price of a Bentley. If you need a Camry and Toyota of Helena is asking $750,000, you'd probably just go get one in Butte or Missoula or somewhere. Same car. Sure, the demand might be up so you may pay a premium, but it won't be a Bentley pricing.

Sorry for the extended metaphor, but I think it's pretty simple that if the rare and valuable goods are off the market, and there are a multitude of commodities to use as replacements, it doesn't just automatically make them as expensive as the rare and valuable ones. I guess I could have used pro sports contracts as an example instead of cars.

 

[HelenaHandBasket]

Which is why I brought up the counter. If the Bentleys aren't an option, there are many more Toyotas from which to choose. That doesn't make them able to command the price of a Bentley. If you need a Camry and Toyota of Helena is asking $750,000, you'd probably just go get one in Butte or Missoula or somewhere. Same car. Sure, the demand might be up so you may pay a premium, but it won't be a Bentley pricing.

Sorry for the extended metaphor, but I think it's pretty simple that if the rare and valuable goods are off the market, and there are a multitude of commodities to use as replacements, it doesn't just automatically make them as expensive as the rare and valuable ones. I guess I could have used pro sports contracts as an example instead of cars.

I think we can agree to disagree.

 

[BigRock]

To be fair, Florida State has been disappointing with elite recruits since well before NIL. It's actually one of the most reliable annual storylines in college football.