The Mind of Mike is a crazy place and NIL is a crazy situation. Some NIL rumors I’m hearing.
— Some of this will be vague so bear with me as it’s not my style to out specific schools when it comes to NIL violations and/or NIL culture shifts. You can read between the lines if you’d like.
First off, I’m hearing rumors that the recruitment of Jaden Rashada will be investigated by the NCAA from the start to the end. They are not looking for small recruiting violations here, they are looking for pay-for-play NIL offers known and coordinated by specific schools. I’ve been told that Rashada was offered NIL incentives from the beginning of his process with some handled the right way through collectives and some in direct coordination with the athletic department. It will be on the NCAA to sort this out but I’m hearing they are going to look to send a message on this one.
Now we all know the NCAA is essentially toothless overall and investigations and punishment take years and often just fizzle but the talk here is that as NIL gets out of hand and collectives and athletic departments are working hand in hand and incentives are being offered and in some cases received before an LOI is signed the NCAA wants to make an example of one or a few schools. I’ve been told that the schools being investigated have been informed and this process will play out immediately. I’ve heard specific schools but until something more formal is announced I’ll keep them quiet. Some schools I’ve heard may not end up being investigated in the end.
— In regards to collectives and coaches I’m hearing at least two major Power Five schools are experiencing some internal issues. What does this mean? In one case it’s the collective not agreeing with the choice of a player the coaching staff is targeting for the 2024 class so a power struggle is beginning. In another case, it’s infighting amongst the collective over who gets what priority for NIL deals.
I expected all of this to happen and it makes sense. What if the boosters i.e. the collective want one player the coaching staff isn’t as high on? Who wins? Since these NIL deals aren’t supposed to be in conjunction with coaches, how does this work? You can’t make an NIL arrangement for a player that is 1B at a position and not 1A right? Or can you? In the case of a QB, what happens if the collective wants a signal caller who is highly regarded and has connections to the school and the coaches want someone else more highly rated but not as much in favor with the collective? This is happening right now with one Power Five school.
More Sports News
And collective infighting isn’t anything new but is becoming more common. Boosters pool money but if some want a particular player to reap the most benefits and some want another then the infighting can impact the direction. This means less money potentially for a player compared to a school where the collective is on the same page. This can impact recruiting greatly. Oh, and as expected, coaches are more than ever before having to answer to booster wants and deal with booster unhappiness. This is a slippery slope when it comes to the balance of power for a program.
— And finally, two Power Five programs I know of have had to have sit-down positional meetings with their team over NIL. Why? In one case, it was because a position coach told every DL they landed that they would be No. 1 for NIL consideration. So one team that landed nine DL in their class has an issue as all were promised to be No. 1 in NIL focus. And the other program has had to sit down with their current DB group to discuss the NIL promises made to recruits. These are veteran players who have been on the roster for at least one season already disgruntled because of what they are hearing was promised to incoming recruits.
— The bottom line is that NIL is going to lead to many programs scattered in their focus from roster happiness and lockerroom culture to arguments on who is offered what. The NCAA can’t do much about this because they let the genie out of the bottle when they did nothing to prepare for NIL and any new legislation will be met with an anti trust lawsuit. Eventually, if the government doesn’t get involved, they will have to bite the bullet on these lawsuits and fight them to make changes but it has to happen as the current system is quickly becoming unmanageable.
