Wouldn't this increase the supply of payers?
by rockmcd (2019-02-05 14:39:38)

In reply to: Yes, there's just an endless supply of boosters willing to  posted by jt


Before:
A few rogue boosters paying athletes under the table, putting the programs at risk for violations.

After:
Now that it's all on the up-and-up, all boosters can chip in. NDN posters can start a GoFundMe account for the fullback recruit to come to ND and we'll put his picture on the website to legitimize it.

Or more significantly, Under Armour and ND mutually decide to re-allocate where the money goes in their major contract so that they're endorsing both the team and its individual players. UA wouldn't be just wasting money on kids, they would be spending the same amount of money as before but just allocated in the way that ND asks them to for the benefit of recruiting.

Another example might be someone like Chris Finke gets no endorsement money when he signs as a preferred walk on and maybe a very small amount in his 4th year. But prior to his 5th year, UA gets into a bidding war with Nike and Adidas who are trying to steer him to one of their schools.

Yet another example might be Ian Book not getting very much endorsement money when he was expected to spend his career behind Wimbush and Jurkovec. After coming off the bench and leading them to the CFP in 2018, Book demands to "renegotiate his endorsement deal" or else he'll transfer.

Again, maybe that's all fine to let the free market decide these things. Curious to see if people think these types of hypotheticals are realistic outcomes or outlandish.




Replies: