forums

Pre NIL era Question

W

Walsh5

Recruit
Joined
Oct 27, 2014
Messages
247
This whole Bryce Underwood flip got me thinking about how players used to get "paid."

In reading a lot of the discourse here, the common theme I see is that schools like Miami were at a disadvantage to schools like Alabama, Georgia, Clemson, and Ohio State because they "paid" their players. But now, all of a sudden, UM and other schools have money to pay players.

I apologize if this is an ignorant question, but why exactly didn't we have money before? I'm sure it didn't just appear overnight. If we're giving competitive offers, then we obviously have had it. If the money was there, how come we couldn't utilize it? How were these schools able to get away with paying players in the Pre-NIL era? Why couldn't we deliver the suitcases of cash? Were Alabama boosters just better at hiding it? Were they playing by different rules because of favorable enforcement?

I'm genuinely curious about how things have changed with player compensation now being legalized through NIL and how it's leveled the playing field. Is it like Vegas going from being run by the mob to being run by corporations?

I understand how it might work with Cam Ward. Legitimate corporations like Bose wanted no part of that dirty game, but now that everything is above board, they can bring that legit money that far outweighs what your local car dealership can provide. But then again, that's Cam Ward AFTER he's become a Heisman finalist. Not your typical recruit.
 
Advertisement
Walsh5 said:
This whole Bryce Underwood flip got me thinking about how players used to get "paid."

In reading a lot of the discourse here, the common theme I see is that schools like Miami were at a disadvantage to schools like Alabama, Georgia, Clemson, and Ohio State because they "paid" their players. But now, all of a sudden, UM and other schools have money to pay players.

I apologize if this is an ignorant question, but why exactly didn't we have money before? I'm sure it didn't just appear overnight. If we're giving competitive offers, then we obviously have had it. If the money was there, how come we couldn't utilize it? How were these schools able to get away with paying players in the Pre-NIL era? Why couldn't we deliver the suitcases of cash? Were Alabama boosters just better at hiding it? Were they playing by different rules because of favorable enforcement?

I'm genuinely curious about how things have changed with player compensation now being legalized through NIL and how it's leveled the playing field. Is it like Vegas going from being run by the mob to being run by corporations?

I understand how it might work with Cam Ward. Legitimate corporations like Bose wanted no part of that dirty game, but now that everything is above board, they can bring that legit money that far outweighs what your local car dealership can provide. But then again, that's Cam Ward AFTER he's become a Heisman finalist. Not your typical recruit.
Click to expand...
There are people on CIS who will give you a more complete answer, but I would argue at least 2 things have come into play.

First, the UHealth system derives a lot of revenue for UM, and form what I understand, some/more of that revenue is being distributed to the university. How that exactly plays into NIL, I am admittedly unsure. But it does factor into the overall financial health of the university, which ultimately helps the athletic department.

Second, UM large donors are not the kind that drop off $5-20,000 in a duffle bag and then brag to their buddies about how much money they give to player X. The UM donors life Soffer and Mas are business people. NIL is much more their style, and now the money that used to go entirely to the athletic department or university, can be used to target NIL for certain sports or specific players. And depending on how the NIL is provided, it is a legitimate business expense. With the money being above table at a school like UM, we can now compete and often outdo the below the table money schools.

I’m sure there are other factors, but these 2 stand out to me.
 
AtlAtty said:
There are people on CIS who will give you a more complete answer, but I would argue at least 2 things have come into play.

First, the UHealth system derives a lot of revenue for UM, and form what I understand, some/more of that revenue is being distributed to the university. How that exactly plays into NIL, I am admittedly unsure. But it does factor into the overall financial health of the university, which ultimately helps the athletic department.

Second, UM large donors are not the kind that drop off $5-20,000 in a duffle bag and then brag to their buddies about how much money they give to player X. The UM donors life Soffer and Mas are business people. NIL is much more their style, and now the money that used to go entirely to the athletic department or university, can be used to target NIL for certain sports or specific players. And depending on how the NIL is provided, it is a legitimate business expense. With the money being above table at a school like UM, we can now compete and often outdo the below the table money schools.

I’m sure there are other factors, but these 2 stand out to me.
Click to expand...
How about this, UM avoided paying for players bc it was wrong and risky. Even during the NC years we avoided that businesses bc you know “ Thug U” had the rep and the target on our backs. Even when we got involved with that sc**bag Shapiro, for peanuts the NCAA jammed us. But when the NIL became legit, our donors were all in. Prior to NIL, the bigger schools just didn’t give a f**k, and they had the NCAA in their pockets. When Howard out recruited them in the State of Miami those crooks went in deeper, with big bags and ButtF**king the NCAA harder. Just sayin’🙌🏽
 
Groz73Cane said:
How about this, UM avoided paying for players bc it was wrong and risky. Even during the NC years we avoided that businesses bc you know “ Thug U” had the rep and the target on our backs. Even when we got involved with that sc**bag Shapiro, for peanuts the NCAA jammed us. But when the NIL became legit, our donors were all in. Prior to NIL, the bigger schools just didn’t give a f**k, and they had the NCAA in their pockets. When Howard out recruited them in the State of Miami those crooks went in deeper, with big bags and ButtF**king the NCAA harder. Just sayin’🙌🏽
Click to expand...
My dude, if you think during the glory years we weren't finding ways to $way certain recruits I've got a bridge to sell you. Now we couldn't be as blatant as like Ohio State or the SEC schools but we were absolutely in on that game. Ask the old schoolers about the car dealerships.
 
Advertisement
Trav said:
My dude, if you think during the glory years we weren't finding ways to $way certain recruits I've got a bridge to sell you. Now we couldn't be as blatant as like Ohio State or the SEC schools but we were absolutely in on that game. Ask the old schoolers about the car dealerships.
Click to expand...
My Dude, I am an old schooler. Bought a Ford econoline van from Hal Sears, MLB on the 73 team. I know all about the dealerships. Don’t mistake my narrative for naivety. The moral high ground is all relative to where the bottom line is. Pre NIL, those mfer’s had no bottom, everything else was Babys**t.
 
Walsh5 said:
This whole Bryce Underwood flip got me thinking about how players used to get "paid."

In reading a lot of the discourse here, the common theme I see is that schools like Miami were at a disadvantage to schools like Alabama, Georgia, Clemson, and Ohio State because they "paid" their players. But now, all of a sudden, UM and other schools have money to pay players.

I apologize if this is an ignorant question, but why exactly didn't we have money before? I'm sure it didn't just appear overnight. If we're giving competitive offers, then we obviously have had it. If the money was there, how come we couldn't utilize it? How were these schools able to get away with paying players in the Pre-NIL era? Why couldn't we deliver the suitcases of cash? Were Alabama boosters just better at hiding it? Were they playing by different rules because of favorable enforcement?

I'm genuinely curious about how things have changed with player compensation now being legalized through NIL and how it's leveled the playing field. Is it like Vegas going from being run by the mob to being run by corporations?

I understand how it might work with Cam Ward. Legitimate corporations like Bose wanted no part of that dirty game, but now that everything is above board, they can bring that legit money that far outweighs what your local car dealership can provide. But then again, that's Cam Ward AFTER he's become a Heisman finalist. Not your typical recruit.
Click to expand...
It's simple we paid players, but couldn't do it nearly at the level of Bama or Ohio State, due to the fact that NCAA was always monitoring us and just waiting to make an example out of us, while turning a blind eye to Bama and other big schools. Now it is legal so we can pay with no restrictions just like Bama always could.
 
IMG_2859.jpeg

This was SI cover when NIL became legal. Can you imagine getting caught when it was against the rules?
 
Cynically stated, nothing has changed over time but the dollar amounts, but we got 5 years of investigation and almost the death penalty on account of a few party nights and a used washing machine
 
Advertisement
AtlAtty said:
There are people on CIS who will give you a more complete answer, but I would argue at least 2 things have come into play.

First, the UHealth system derives a lot of revenue for UM, and form what I understand, some/more of that revenue is being distributed to the university. How that exactly plays into NIL, I am admittedly unsure. But it does factor into the overall financial health of the university, which ultimately helps the athletic department.

Second, UM large donors are not the kind that drop off $5-20,000 in a duffle bag and then brag to their buddies about how much money they give to player X. The UM donors life Soffer and Mas are business people. NIL is much more their style, and now the money that used to go entirely to the athletic department or university, can be used to target NIL for certain sports or specific players. And depending on how the NIL is provided, it is a legitimate business expense. With the money being above table at a school like UM, we can now compete and often outdo the below the table money schools.

I’m sure there are other factors, but these 2 stand out to me.
Click to expand...
Didn't even think of the legitimate business expense aspect to use for tax write-offs.

Real big-money donors probably didn't want to get involved with the super shady stuff.
 
johnnytsunami01 said:
It's simple we paid players, but couldn't do it nearly at the level of Bama or Ohio State, due to the fact that NCAA was always monitoring us and just waiting to make an example out of us, while turning a blind eye to Bama and other big schools. Now it is legal so we can pay with no restrictions just like Bama always could.
Click to expand...
To be fair, Terrell Pryor did get pinched for some free tattoos when he was at OSU.
 
Walsh5 said:
This whole Bryce Underwood flip got me thinking about how players used to get "paid."

In reading a lot of the discourse here, the common theme I see is that schools like Miami were at a disadvantage to schools like Alabama, Georgia, Clemson, and Ohio State because they "paid" their players. But now, all of a sudden, UM and other schools have money to pay players.

I apologize if this is an ignorant question, but why exactly didn't we have money before? I'm sure it didn't just appear overnight. If we're giving competitive offers, then we obviously have had it. If the money was there, how come we couldn't utilize it? How were these schools able to get away with paying players in the Pre-NIL era? Why couldn't we deliver the suitcases of cash? Were Alabama boosters just better at hiding it? Were they playing by different rules because of favorable enforcement?

I'm genuinely curious about how things have changed with player compensation now being legalized through NIL and how it's leveled the playing field. Is it like Vegas going from being run by the mob to being run by corporations?

I understand how it might work with Cam Ward. Legitimate corporations like Bose wanted no part of that dirty game, but now that everything is above board, they can bring that legit money that far outweighs what your local car dealership can provide. But then again, that's Cam Ward AFTER he's become a Heisman finalist. Not your typical recruit.
Click to expand...
www.bannersociety.com

Meet the bag man: 10 rules for paying college players

How to buy college football players, in the words of men who deliver the money.
www.bannersociety.com www.bannersociety.com
 
bdcane4eva said:
When your best friend is in charge of the NCAA you can do anything you want ..this ain't that complex..just pure corruption.
Click to expand...

Alabama's long history of unpunished NCAA violations under Nick Saban | mgoblog

It's time to either pay the players or have powerful people in college football start talking and exposing Alabama and Nick for what they are because this is getting silly. College football isn't fun anymore. This is John Wooden/UCLA/Sam Gilbert all over again. You can't sign the #1 recruiting...
mgoblog.com mgoblog.com
 
Advertisement
Walsh5 said:
This whole Bryce Underwood flip got me thinking about how players used to get "paid."

In reading a lot of the discourse here, the common theme I see is that schools like Miami were at a disadvantage to schools like Alabama, Georgia, Clemson, and Ohio State because they "paid" their players. But now, all of a sudden, UM and other schools have money to pay players.

I apologize if this is an ignorant question, but why exactly didn't we have money before? I'm sure it didn't just appear overnight. If we're giving competitive offers, then we obviously have had it. If the money was there, how come we couldn't utilize it? How were these schools able to get away with paying players in the Pre-NIL era? Why couldn't we deliver the suitcases of cash? Were Alabama boosters just better at hiding it? Were they playing by different rules because of favorable enforcement?

I'm genuinely curious about how things have changed with player compensation now being legalized through NIL and how it's leveled the playing field. Is it like Vegas going from being run by the mob to being run by corporations?

I understand how it might work with Cam Ward. Legitimate corporations like Bose wanted no part of that dirty game, but now that everything is above board, they can bring that legit money that far outweighs what your local car dealership can provide. But then again, that's Cam Ward AFTER he's become a Heisman finalist. Not your typical recruit.
Click to expand...
Because we were being watched that’s why. The NCAA chose who to watch
 
johnnytsunami01 said:
It's simple we paid players, but couldn't do it nearly at the level of Bama or Ohio State, due to the fact that NCAA was always monitoring us and just waiting to make an example out of us, while turning a blind eye to Bama and other big schools. Now it is legal so we can pay with no restrictions just like Bama always could.
Click to expand...
Facts
 
I would think most legit millionaire or billionaire businessman wouldn't risk being caught up in paying amateur athletes illegally to play football.Those (outside sources) who were really funding the bags before NIL. Not the actual school. Dumb stuff like that easily gets you caught up in Pell Grant scandals or maybe even calling card scandals. Better to use a outside source who isn't a billion dollar theif going broke like Shapiro.
 
Advertisement
Advertisement
Back
Top