So, the NIL has almost immediately become exactly what most of us knew it would be, straight up Pay-for-Play without even pretending to be otherwise, and with it, the anytime transfer portal has become just the college version of free agency. The logical conclusion to this series of events is nothing less than the utter ruination of college football if allowed to proceed unchecked. Now, I've never been one to just complain without trying to come up with a workable solution and I know that the genie is out of the bottle, so-to-speak, so a compromise is the only real option moving forward... this would be my proposal and I'd appreciate hearing you guys' thoughts on it.
The Transfer Portal:
I think it has become glaringly obvious that allowing unfettered transfers is bad for all involved. It's chaos for the schools and it's creating a lot of circumstances where kids - immature and reactionary by nature - simply bail for someplace they think is going to be less work more fun, more profitable or even just due to homesickness as most of these kids are leaving home for the first time ever. If you raise kids you know that having an easy outlet to quit whenever things get rough (or even just seem to be getting rough) is rarely a good thing for them. I've spoken to any number of former players and almost to a man, every single one who attended an out-of-state college (and many who stayed in-state) have said the following two things in unison: 1) If I had had the option of the transfer portal, I absolutely would have quit at some point in my freshman or sophomore year and gone somewhere where I felt I would be better treated, have an easier path to starting, been closer to home, etc. and 2) it would have absolutely been a mistake for me to do so. Having to stay where I was, learn to deal with the real world, take responsibility for my situation and a good long hard look at who I really was vs. who I thought I was ended up being a big part of my eventual success and why I'm the man I am today (I'm paraphrasing from multiple conversations, of course).
Now I think the transfer portal also offers a lot of good things, we've seen numerous examples already of kids dramatically improving their situation by transferring, so I'm not suggesting that it go away. What I think all could agree on is that it needs to be limited to a specific time frame. I'm open to any number of options as to exactly when that might be, but what makes the most sense to me at the moment is for it to be March 1st to May 31st. Basically from a month after National Signing Day, when team rosters have begun to settle down all the way until after every spring practice and spring game in the country has concluded, giving coaches AND players a better idea of where they stand on the depth chart. Such an arrangement would allow for players and coaches to honestly appraise their situations and have the freedom to move, but not in a knee-jerk or irresponsible manner.
NIL:
Anyone who knows me knows that I'm against the NIL entirely, but that genie is likewise out of the bottle and railing against it won't accomplish anything for anyone.... by the same token, anyone with common sense can look at it as it is right now and recognize that in its current form it is a very bad thing for college football and is only going to get worse over time. The whole selling point of the NIL was that it would allow players to benefit from the use of their name and likeness, presumably due to their performance and popularity on the football field (or basketball court or whatever). But all of these inducements going to HS kids whom have never played a down of college football and have accomplished absolutely nothing in their careers goes against both the spirit and the intent of the entire process. I feel like this is a pretty easy fix for the NCAA, and a relatively easy way to continue to allow student athletes to benefit from their efforts.
If we were to simply ban student-athletes from benefitting from the NIL until they had completed their first year of eligibility, I think a LOT of this goes away. Kids actually have to have done something to be recognized before they can start cashing in on how recognizable they are. It keeps the recruiting bidding wars at bay (the above the table ones anyway), because a year away is an eternity to a 17 or 18 year old and their focus will return to the criteria that actually matters when it comes to deciding on a school. The kids who supposedly make all the money for their school will still benefit from doing so, it will just happen AFTER they've actually contributed something rather than as a matter of speculation over what they might do, which was how it was supposed to work anyway. It will even provide some impetus for them to put in the work at the most crucial time in their careers - their freshman seasons - without the distractions of juggling a sudden influx of cash, taxes, hangers-on looking to profit from their sudden success and so on.
If you extended this ban to transfers, saying that once they transferred, they were ineligible for any new NIL agreements until they had completed a year of eligibility at their new school, it would even go a long way towards stamping down the free agency madness currently taking place, all while still allowing kids who were actually making money for their schools to benefit.
Finally, this approach also goes a long way towards protecting schools, boosters and local businesses from blowing the bank on kids who are as likely to flame out as to be successful by giving them an actual product to bid for rather than simply pouring cash onto the fire, hoping theirs burns brightest. Otherwise, we are quickly on our way towards a small group of wealthy schools being able to buy top 5 class after top 5 class and then double down by also cherry-picking elite talent from rival schools through use of the NIL/Transfer Portal.
I think these proposals - a set transfer period for the portal and a moratorium on NIL agreements for incoming freshmen - are reasonable compromises that go a long way towards protecting the kids, the schools and college football as a whole... what do you think?
The Transfer Portal:
I think it has become glaringly obvious that allowing unfettered transfers is bad for all involved. It's chaos for the schools and it's creating a lot of circumstances where kids - immature and reactionary by nature - simply bail for someplace they think is going to be less work more fun, more profitable or even just due to homesickness as most of these kids are leaving home for the first time ever. If you raise kids you know that having an easy outlet to quit whenever things get rough (or even just seem to be getting rough) is rarely a good thing for them. I've spoken to any number of former players and almost to a man, every single one who attended an out-of-state college (and many who stayed in-state) have said the following two things in unison: 1) If I had had the option of the transfer portal, I absolutely would have quit at some point in my freshman or sophomore year and gone somewhere where I felt I would be better treated, have an easier path to starting, been closer to home, etc. and 2) it would have absolutely been a mistake for me to do so. Having to stay where I was, learn to deal with the real world, take responsibility for my situation and a good long hard look at who I really was vs. who I thought I was ended up being a big part of my eventual success and why I'm the man I am today (I'm paraphrasing from multiple conversations, of course).
Now I think the transfer portal also offers a lot of good things, we've seen numerous examples already of kids dramatically improving their situation by transferring, so I'm not suggesting that it go away. What I think all could agree on is that it needs to be limited to a specific time frame. I'm open to any number of options as to exactly when that might be, but what makes the most sense to me at the moment is for it to be March 1st to May 31st. Basically from a month after National Signing Day, when team rosters have begun to settle down all the way until after every spring practice and spring game in the country has concluded, giving coaches AND players a better idea of where they stand on the depth chart. Such an arrangement would allow for players and coaches to honestly appraise their situations and have the freedom to move, but not in a knee-jerk or irresponsible manner.
NIL:
Anyone who knows me knows that I'm against the NIL entirely, but that genie is likewise out of the bottle and railing against it won't accomplish anything for anyone.... by the same token, anyone with common sense can look at it as it is right now and recognize that in its current form it is a very bad thing for college football and is only going to get worse over time. The whole selling point of the NIL was that it would allow players to benefit from the use of their name and likeness, presumably due to their performance and popularity on the football field (or basketball court or whatever). But all of these inducements going to HS kids whom have never played a down of college football and have accomplished absolutely nothing in their careers goes against both the spirit and the intent of the entire process. I feel like this is a pretty easy fix for the NCAA, and a relatively easy way to continue to allow student athletes to benefit from their efforts.
If we were to simply ban student-athletes from benefitting from the NIL until they had completed their first year of eligibility, I think a LOT of this goes away. Kids actually have to have done something to be recognized before they can start cashing in on how recognizable they are. It keeps the recruiting bidding wars at bay (the above the table ones anyway), because a year away is an eternity to a 17 or 18 year old and their focus will return to the criteria that actually matters when it comes to deciding on a school. The kids who supposedly make all the money for their school will still benefit from doing so, it will just happen AFTER they've actually contributed something rather than as a matter of speculation over what they might do, which was how it was supposed to work anyway. It will even provide some impetus for them to put in the work at the most crucial time in their careers - their freshman seasons - without the distractions of juggling a sudden influx of cash, taxes, hangers-on looking to profit from their sudden success and so on.
If you extended this ban to transfers, saying that once they transferred, they were ineligible for any new NIL agreements until they had completed a year of eligibility at their new school, it would even go a long way towards stamping down the free agency madness currently taking place, all while still allowing kids who were actually making money for their schools to benefit.
Finally, this approach also goes a long way towards protecting schools, boosters and local businesses from blowing the bank on kids who are as likely to flame out as to be successful by giving them an actual product to bid for rather than simply pouring cash onto the fire, hoping theirs burns brightest. Otherwise, we are quickly on our way towards a small group of wealthy schools being able to buy top 5 class after top 5 class and then double down by also cherry-picking elite talent from rival schools through use of the NIL/Transfer Portal.
I think these proposals - a set transfer period for the portal and a moratorium on NIL agreements for incoming freshmen - are reasonable compromises that go a long way towards protecting the kids, the schools and college football as a whole... what do you think?
Last edited:
