College Football News, Rumor & Humor

[onealcd]

Texas and Texas A&M generate about $200 million a year in revenues. Most of the frequent top 10 teams aren't that far behind. There are some huge money people behind these programs.

It won't be long at all for Saban or Harbaugh or the other top coaches to play a round of golf with a couple of these guys and mention how by the way that kid from Dallas or Akron or where ever sure would help their line depth but X other school is telling them they will get money from their guys. In no time that kid has "a better offer."

For these people their college team is like a toy. It's bragging rights at the country club, it's their chance to puff up their chest at the executive session at the industry convention. They don't care if their "advertising" money doesn't reach a big target market, they care more if it produced a team that beats their rival.

You just listed three programs this will all benefit. So yes I agree I’m talking about the small town schools that have great atmospheres and local support that appeal to recruits right now. The best example I can think of is Iowa. This isn’t going to help them compared to who they are trying to beat.

 

[MtnBuff]

You just listed three programs this will all benefit. So yes I agree I’m talking about the small town schools that have great atmospheres and local support that appeal to recruits right now. The best example I can think of is Iowa. This isn’t going to help them compared to who they are trying to beat.

For a school like Iowa it will be tough, especially if they have a bad year in agriculture or other economic hit.

Ohio State is in Columbus, Michigan is in Ann Arbor. Both though have plenty of well funded alums in Chicago, Detroit, New York, LA, and elsewhere who will do everything they can to make sure that they can wear their school hats and jackets to the next golf tourney with pride.

Sure UDub is in Seattle, and Cal is in the Bay Area. Rutgers happens to be close to New York but it doesn't help. Those schools and their fans/alumni don't have the same culture as those schools you talk about from small towns.

This thing isn't about making effective advertising buys. It is about winning football games and the people who are willing to pay to make that a priority.

 

[CarolinaBuff]

You have Oregon and Portland, asu in Phoenix, Utah in Salt Lake City, CU in Denver, TCU in Dallas, Missouri and Kansas with Kansas City, TCU with dallas, A&M with houston, Clemson with Charlotte, LSU with Nola, Wisconsin with Milwaukee, Michigan with detroit, cal and Stanford in the Bay Area, Florida with Orlando and Jacksonville, Minnesota with Minneapolis, notre dame with Chicago, I’m going to stop there but the resources in those cities and the amount of stupid money that is thrown around for marketing is going start to really show and quickly. It’s a lot different than some boosters throwing their money around in small towns like they do now.

That could be the case, we just don't know how this is all gonna play out. In the end I just don't think things will be much different than they are now.

 

[The Alabaster Yak]

The only way it changes anything is if it changes recruiting and the only way it changes recruiting is if the University gets third party companies to “commit” to spending money on recruits as soon as they enroll. Something like, “for every (4/5*) recruit, we’ll offer this and he can be featured in this (marketing piece)”. Then there are the actual players on the team who everybody already knows. That’s where companies will spend most of their marketing dollars, but that doesn’t necessarily mean much to a 4/5* Junior or Senior in high school when making a decision.

 

[onealcd]

The only way it changes anything is if it changes recruiting and the only way it changes recruiting is if the University gets third party companies to “commit” to spending money on recruits as soon as they enroll. Something like, “for every (4/5*) recruit, we’ll offer this and he can be featured in this (marketing piece)”. Then there are the actual players on the team who everybody already knows. That’s where companies will spend most of their marketing dollars, but that doesn’t necessarily mean much to a 4/5* Junior or Senior in high school when making a decision.

Recruits and players talk. It just becomes another tool to use when trying to land these kids. Hey our guys averaged $xxx amount last year in sponsorships and appearances, they other 4 finalists you have averaged half that. The money is going to become a lot bigger selling point than just about everything else other than development/nfl draft pick success.

 

[The Alabaster Yak]

Recruits and players talk. It just becomes another tool to use when trying to land these kids. Hey our guys averaged $xxx amount last year in sponsorships and appearances, they other 4 finalists you have averaged half that. The money is going to become a lot bigger selling point than just about everything else other than development/nfl draft pick success.

So it would actually make sense that things will likely remain the same. Ohio State, Bama, Clemson, Georgia, Michigan, etc will make sure their guys average the same or more as everybody else.

 

[onealcd]

So it would actually make sense that things will likely remain the same. Ohio State, Bama, Clemson, Georgia, Michigan, etc will make sure their guys average the same or more as everybody else.

Like I said, I think this will help the teams in heavily populated areas more than those schools in small towns. Sort of moving college football one step closer to a condensed nfl model unfortunately. Hopefully i am wrong and obviously money doesn’t mean everything or Texas would win the championship every year but like we talk about with resources in the pac 12, over the long haul it will hurt those schools.

 

[The Alabaster Yak]

Like I said, I think this will help the teams in heavily populated areas more than those schools in small towns. Sort of moving college football one step closer to a condensed nfl model unfortunately. Hopefully i am wrong and obviously money doesn’t mean everything or Texas would win the championship every year but like we talk about with resources in the pac 12, over the long haul it will hurt those schools.

Assuming there is some kind of cap on earning per player, I just can't see Alabama suffering because it's in Tuscaloosa relative to Vanderbilt because it's in Nashville.

 

[steph]

What I think will be interesting is what will happen when there are conflicts between marketing using the university and marketing using individual players (who aren't representing the team). For example the latest superstar at Oregon gets a deal from Adidas, or say the University has a big corporate sponsorship from Ford, and their star quarterback pitches Chevrolet. It may start pissing some people off.

 

[onealcd]

Assuming there is some kind of cap on earning per player, I just can't see Alabama suffering because it's in Tuscaloosa relative to Vanderbilt because it's in Nashville.

There is no cap on the amount a player can make from NIL.

 

[manhattanbuff]

What I think will be interesting is what will happen when there are conflicts between marketing using the university and marketing using individual players (who aren't representing the team). For example the latest superstar at Oregon gets a deal from Adidas, or say the University has a big corporate sponsorship from Ford, and their star quarterback pitches Chevrolet. It may start pissing some people off.

University wide sports sponsorships from larger companies are likely to diminish in a world where the school can’t guarantee brand uniformity. The smart schools will get ahead of it by pre arranging the sponsorship deals and packaging star players with the school to shill the company product(s).

 

[dwyermj]

How many players are going to be marketable though? Even in a CFB hotbed town are the linemen and other non-skill m\ players going to get deals? Or the non-star WR's and RB's on the team, which are the majority of players at these positions? I doubt it.

Also, a good analogy I saw is any market can't support an endless number of endorsement deals:

I think this is going to have a big part of it but in an interesting way. We all know from recent experience talent on the lines is really what moves the needle in football. In my opinion the blue bloods with big donor bases are going to get their boosters to sponsor the most important players to them, including linemen. Compare this to a city like Boulder where the sponsorships will mostly be business decisions looking for marketable players. The market rate for the 3 star starting QB is going to be a lot higher than the 5 star nose tackle. Saban will figure out how to get the nose tackle paid well. Just my guess.

I think in reality the NCAA is going to screw this up by trying to set market rates. It is going to be similar to what we have now only the players will be making a little more money from a legitimate way. Bag men will still reign for the SEC and other blue bloods.

 

[Big Jim]

Like I said, I think this will help the teams in heavily populated areas more than those schools in small towns.

This is why the original internet freakout when California passed this legislation was because USC and UCLA have a big advantage over the rest of the country. USC especially as UCLA is famous for self inflicted mediocrity.

 

[Big Jim]

There is no cap on the amount a player can make from NIL.

With new realities it is common for people to just make **** up.

 

[The Alabaster Yak]

There is no cap on the amount a player can make from NIL.

With new realities it is common for people to just make **** up.

Apologies. DBT said earlier that "According to the NCAA, they would establish a FMV for commercial appearances and monitor payments closely". I thought he said they would establish a cap on commercial appearances. My mistake.

 

[onealcd]

Apologies. DBT said earlier that "According to the NCAA, they would establish a FMV for commercial appearances and monitor payments closely". I thought he said they would establish a cap on commercial appearances. My mistake.

Maybe they try but I don’t see that going over well.

 

[onealcd]

This is why the original internet freakout when California passed this legislation was because USC and UCLA have a big advantage over the rest of the country. USC especially as UCLA is famous for self inflicted mediocrity.

Yeah usc is going to benefit from this greatly. The marketing opportunities in LA are awesome. Same with texas, who pretty much dominate austin, San Antonio and Dallas markets for college football.

 

[hokiehead]

Yeah usc is going to benefit from this greatly. The marketing opportunities in LA are awesome. Same with texas, who pretty much dominate austin, San Antonio and Dallas markets for college football.

I like the way you're thinking and believe it makes a lot of sense. a few musings of mine on this...

one of my first thoughts after reading this was "which NYC area schools will benefit?" "will the ACC and B1G see recruiting upticks from their exposure in that market. "maybe" is where I landed, for two main reasons below:

• The Pac is setup far better with two P5 schools actually in the city LA (essentially if not literally). The nearest P5 school to NYC is Rutgers.
• however, one thing that both the LA and the NYC markets share -- neither has a fan base that GAF about college sports. I think that's going to be a serious impediment for endorsement opportunities w/r/t Austin.

thinking about other large markets for endorsements that actually do GAF about college sports -- the Chicago market first comes to mind (back to the B1G). I don't think NW and UI are not about to become recruiting powerhouses, but given that Notre Dame, UM, MSU and UW have huge alumni bases in Chicago those schools could see significant benefit from this. Through Purdue and Iowa in there as well and the B1G could actually see a really big uptick in recruiting.

DC, Florida are the next largest markets we haven't discussed -- I never considered that the ACC could come out somewhat ahead on this previously, but looking at it from the perspective of "which markets could offer the most revenue potential to recruits" has me thinking a bit differently. The B1G's move to grab Maryland may benefit them here.

so then coming back to the SEC. they have A&M with a presence in Houston, they completely own Atlanta and they have some penetration of fans/alumni in the Miami area. But that's it. All the rest of the top 20 markets are in the West, the Northeast and the Midwest.

I think you're right, this could be a game changer. I also think @TSchekler has a valid point that things could very well balance out to maintain status quo. The warchests at the SEC schools are so large compared to everyone else right now that they have time to position themselves for change.

 

[The Alabaster Yak]

If Nike is going to be committed to supporting Oregon athletics, there is really no excuse for their recruiting classes falling outside of the top 3-5 going forward. Nike can easily just pay every recruit and every player to do various ad campaigns no matter how big or small. Maryland with Under Armour too.

 

[hokiehead]

If Nike is going to be committed to supporting Oregon athletics, there is really no excuse for their recruiting classes falling outside of the top 3-5 going forward. Nike can easily just pay every recruit and every player to do various ad campaigns no matter how big or small. Maryland with Under Armour too.

and you're getting to a good point....
@onealcd is looking at it from the perspective of "which markets have the most potential"

you're basically asking "which brands are the most marketable using collegiate athletic endorsements" along with 'what schools are they affiliated with'

maybe the next question is "which products are the most marketable using collegiate athletic endorsements". e.g. shoes and other athletic wear jump out as obvious examples. But then I think about the college sports consumers -- what products are most marketable to that audience? my head goes to what i see advertised during games on TV: beer (NCAA issues?), cars, business IT and consulting services. so, how does the money flow in this environment? those are national markets targeting broadcast audiences -- they're going to go with players from schools that are getting the most TV coverage. This leads to your status quo and the rich get richer. Secondarily , this could be a bump for Boise State of all schools.

it all comes down to relative weight of the various forces: local market cap, brand / school affiliation, national market audience. and whatever else we haven't thought through yet.

 

[onealcd]

I like the way you're thinking and believe it makes a lot of sense. a few musings of mine on this...

one of my first thoughts after reading this was "which NYC area schools will benefit?" "will the ACC and B1G see recruiting upticks from their exposure in that market. "maybe" is where I landed, for two main reasons below:

• The Pac is setup far better with two P5 schools actually in the city LA (essentially if not literally). The nearest P5 school to NYC is Rutgers.
• however, one thing that both the LA and the NYC markets share -- neither has a fan base that GAF about college sports. I think that's going to be a serious impediment for endorsement opportunities w/r/t Austin.

thinking about other large markets for endorsements that actually do GAF about college sports -- the Chicago market first comes to mind (back to the B1G). I don't think NW and UI are not about to become recruiting powerhouses, but given that Notre Dame, UM, MSU and UW have huge alumni bases in Chicago those schools could see significant benefit from this. Through Purdue and Iowa in there as well and the B1G could actually see a really big uptick in recruiting.

DC, Florida are the next largest markets we haven't discussed -- I never considered that the ACC could come out somewhat ahead on this previously, but looking at it from the perspective of "which markets could offer the most revenue potential to recruits" has me thinking a bit differently. The B1G's move to grab Maryland may benefit them here.

so then coming back to the SEC. they have A&M with a presence in Houston, they completely own Atlanta and they have some penetration of fans/alumni in the Miami area. But that's it. All the rest of the top 20 markets are in the West, the Northeast and the Midwest.

I think you're right, this could be a game changer. I also think @TSchekler has a valid point that things could very well balance out to maintain status quo. The warchests at the SEC schools are so large compared to everyone else right now that they have time to position themselves for change.

I would imagine Penn State will benefit the most from NYC but most of the Big-10 East schools have a great presence in NYC, Michigan especially.

 

[Big Jim]

• The Pac is setup far better with two P5 schools actually in the city LA (essentially if not literally). The nearest P5 school to NYC is Rutgers.
• however, one thing that both the LA and the NYC markets share -- neither has a fan base that GAF about college sports.

• USC and UCLA are both literally in the city of Los Angeles.
• Los Angeles is a huge college football town...when USC is competing for championships. USC is relatively down now but throw in endorsement opportunities and LA is quickly a college football town once again.

 

[hokiehead]

• USC and UCLA are both literally in the city of Los Angeles.
• Los Angeles is a huge college football town...when USC is competing for championships. USC is relatively down now but throw in endorsement opportunities and LA is quickly a college football town once again.

I'll take your word for it. I've only been following.the Pac12 closely for 6 years, but I know in 2016 - 2017 they weren't filling the Colesium, even with it's reduced capacity.

 

[Big Jim]

I'll take your word for it. I've only been following.the Pac12 closely for 6 years, but I know in 2016 - 2017 they weren't filling the Colesium, even with it's reduced capacity.

 

[The Alabaster Yak]

View attachment 36539

Back when Kim K was a smoke

 

[Big Jim]

I'll take your word for it. I've only been following.the Pac12 closely for 6 years, but I know in 2016 - 2017 they weren't filling the Colesium, even with it's reduced capacity.

USC rivals Notre Dame, Bama, and Texas for fan engagement and arrogance when they are rolling. Pre-Saban Bama was a **** show with relative fan apathy, UT for longer than USC. The bluest bluebloods even have low tide eras but are still 1%'ers.

 

[4DemBuffs]

I'll take your word for it. I've only been following.the Pac12 closely for 6 years, but I know in 2016 - 2017 they weren't filling the Colesium, even with it's reduced capacity.

Let’s try it with a competent coach and AD at USC. See what you get there.

 

[CarolinaBuff]

Recruits and players talk. It just becomes another tool to use when trying to land these kids. Hey our guys averaged $xxx amount last year in sponsorships and appearances, they other 4 finalists you have averaged half that. The money is going to become a lot bigger selling point than just about everything else other than development/nfl draft pick success.

Not a bad point, kind of like the idea of the bagman, where boosters will indirectly offer a kid a certain amount of money knowing they had no chance of landing him, but it was a "cost of business" type of deal.

 

[somebody]

Maybe this was said indirectly before, but I don't think marketability has much to do with it. E.g. Saban will have a top 40 and the boosters will try to buy the best 25 they can. They'll use them for marketing to justify the payments.

 

[onealcd]

Not a bad point, kind of like the idea of the bagman, where boosters will indirectly offer a kid a certain amount of money knowing they had no chance of landing him, but it was a "cost of business" type of deal.

Yeah but imagine when big money gets invoked, and not just rich booster money.