Started By
Message
re: NIL was supposed to make the strong stronger. But is it actually creating more parity?
Posted on 10/6/24 at 10:00 am to GeauxTigers1410
Posted on 10/6/24 at 10:00 am to GeauxTigers1410
Starting to look like the NFL with the parity. Any given Saturday 
0
Posted on 10/6/24 at 10:03 am to TigerFan244
With all the $$$ being paid to players, you are going to see more and more and more kids playing only for the $$$ and not the school. Winning games becomes secondary to getting the cash. These kids are too young emotionally to handle being professional athletes.
Posted on 10/6/24 at 10:18 am to bamabaseballsec
quote:
The alleged gap between Oregon Ohio st and Texas vs bama lsu Clemson is way smaller than the gap between Texas and and everyone in the big 12 over the past ten years. I’d look for results first. Times are changing but the more they change you’ll find out the more they stay the same
I thought we were talking NIL? The haves in NIL are not going to be the same haves from the bag game era. Sorry bama, lsu, Clemson, etc.
Posted on 10/6/24 at 10:26 am to TigerFan244
There may be SLIGHTLY more parity but no, the parity argument because of last night and UGA/Bama is bullshite. With NIL, the big schools are still getting the big recruits. The recruiting rankings haven’t changed much other than Texas sucking in the 2010s to pulling top 5 classes.
Vandy beating Bama last night does not change the fact that we saw the most talented roster get beaten by the least talented. Vandy still sucks talent wise, Bama is still good. Bama is just overrated and doesn’t have Saban anymore.
The parity fallacy is just because we’re all used to one of 3 schools being top dog in the SEC for the last 15 years: UGA, LSU, or Bama with some outside challenger. So everyone’s saying “more parity” because they can’t imagine a world when none of those schools are in the big 3. UGA, LSU and Bama just aren’t dominant this year.
Vandy beating Bama last night does not change the fact that we saw the most talented roster get beaten by the least talented. Vandy still sucks talent wise, Bama is still good. Bama is just overrated and doesn’t have Saban anymore.
The parity fallacy is just because we’re all used to one of 3 schools being top dog in the SEC for the last 15 years: UGA, LSU, or Bama with some outside challenger. So everyone’s saying “more parity” because they can’t imagine a world when none of those schools are in the big 3. UGA, LSU and Bama just aren’t dominant this year.
Posted on 10/6/24 at 10:59 am to TigerFan244
quote:
NIL was supposed to make the strong stronger. But is it actually creating more parity?
Not everyone felt that way.
The Yahoo College Football Enquirer guys (Pat Forde, Dan Wetzel) predicted it would bring parity several years ago.
Posted on 10/6/24 at 11:01 am to Boomer65
quote:
receipt for disaster
Recipe numbnuts
Posted on 10/6/24 at 11:02 am to ColoradoAg
quote:
The problem is that NIL created a bunch of mercs
A&M has seen the light.
Posted on 10/6/24 at 11:02 am to TigerFan244
Well it is causing movement and roster jumbling.
Posted on 10/6/24 at 11:04 am to UThomas
quote:
The haves in NIL are not going to be the same haves from the bag game era.
Based on what?
Posted on 10/6/24 at 11:05 am to TigerFan244
NIL is showing us what the coaches already knew. Coaching talent was already dispersed evenly in the sport but not the player talent. Now the player talent is dispersed we are seeing who the great coaches are and it's not always the highest paid guys or the guys at big name programs.
Posted on 10/6/24 at 11:07 am to TN Tygah
But Vandy isn't the least talented roster. And, Vandy's coaching staff is in the top tier of the conference. I thought that before the Bama game.
Posted on 10/6/24 at 11:08 am to Quicksilver
The very top has diminished the most.
Teams were stacking all star teams on the bench.
Not possible any longer. 4 and 5 stars won't be sitting on the bench as backups at Bama any longer.
Teams were stacking all star teams on the bench.
Not possible any longer. 4 and 5 stars won't be sitting on the bench as backups at Bama any longer.
Posted on 10/6/24 at 11:12 am to SidewalkTiger
NCAA selective enforcement.
It's not that complicated.
Teams that weren't allowed to pay players have had the hand cuffs removed.
Kinda sucks for the schools that had perfected the bag man system or the NCAA protected programs.
The rest of us are happy the field is fair.
It's not that complicated.
Teams that weren't allowed to pay players have had the hand cuffs removed.
Kinda sucks for the schools that had perfected the bag man system or the NCAA protected programs.
The rest of us are happy the field is fair.
Posted on 10/6/24 at 11:13 am to NickPapageorgio
quote:
NCAA selective enforcement.
It's not that complicated.
Teams that weren't allowed to pay players have had the hand cuffs removed.
Kinda sucks for the schools that had perfected the bag man system or the NCAA protected programs.
The rest of us are happy the field is fair.
That's a retarded take, no offense.
Posted on 10/6/24 at 11:15 am to SidewalkTiger
Yeah.
The NCAA didn't protect favored programs in the past. No way.
And there definitely weren't programs who had nearly perfected paying players under the table.
You must be a kid.
The NCAA didn't protect favored programs in the past. No way.
And there definitely weren't programs who had nearly perfected paying players under the table.
You must be a kid.
Posted on 10/6/24 at 11:21 am to TigerFan244
Honestly I think it's why Saban retired. He could no longer snatch up all the top recruits and have them riding the pine while they develop.
The guy is in 1 of 4 commercial on game day. He didn't retire...he switched professions.
The guy is in 1 of 4 commercial on game day. He didn't retire...he switched professions.
Posted on 10/6/24 at 11:21 am to SidewalkTiger
quote:
Based on what?
The theory goes something like this:
-not every school participated in the bag game, including some strong national brands. Only 8-10 teams were “in”. Bag game was not $100 handshakes from boosters btw.
-the football bag game was a sub $3m expense to get competitive advantage
-in NIL, all national brands are competing
-the threshold for an upper tier NIL program advantage is an order of magnitude higher (say $15m+ annually)
-a lot of that comes from corporate sponsors, which is tied to markets (vs a bag game which could be bankrolled by a few donors).
-many of the bag game school markets are week for corp NIL which means they can’t scale the program to be top tier. Some also have small donor bases
That’s the framework I’ve heard at least. We’ll see to what extent it bears out. Clemson may be a front runner here
Posted on 10/6/24 at 11:23 am to NickPapageorgio
quote:
Yeah.
The NCAA didn't protect favored programs in the past. No way.
And there definitely weren't programs who had nearly perfected paying players under the table.
You must be a kid.
The theory is destroyed by the fact that recruiting rankings really don't look any different now than they did 10 years ago.
Posted on 10/6/24 at 11:28 am to SidewalkTiger
HS recruiting rankings mean less.
You can't keep them all on campus riding the bench for years while you build super depth far above lower level programs.
Washington got to the championship game without great hs recruiting because that's been devalued.
It's apparently too hard a concept for you to grasp.
You can't keep them all on campus riding the bench for years while you build super depth far above lower level programs.
Washington got to the championship game without great hs recruiting because that's been devalued.
It's apparently too hard a concept for you to grasp.
Posted on 10/6/24 at 11:33 am to TigerFan244
We were talking about the same thing. Seems to be making everything g more even.
Page 2 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News